Scott G. Winterton, Deseret News
Many recent letters about the Utah caucuses are thoughtful. We and other friends also left the caucuses dissatisfied with the process, no fault of the good people running them. The system has problems. Every chain is as strong as its weakest link.
To have little or no explanation of how or why a delegate would vote, have no debate and then expect attendees to intelligently select who will represent them is a weak link indeed. Granted, many have made up their minds in advance. But making up minds before candidates' debate seems backwards.
That increased attendance at caucuses is desired does not seem to be in dispute. There is therefore irony in the possibility that, should caucus attendance continue to increase, we could reach primary election numbers but with the "election" held on a flimsy basis.
Other letters about Utah caucuses
- My view: The solution to Utah's water problems
- Dan Liljenquist: What we learned from the...
- In our opinion: Research suggests that...
- In our opinion: Legislators need to better...
- My view: Is the Division of Water Resources...
- Letter: No labels in 2016?
- My view: hippies, 2 Hell's Angels, one...
- Last year's Utah Compromise is a model in...
- Richard Davis: Do presidents have to be... 56
- My view: Get insurance out of health care 49
- My view: Obama's veto won't save Obamacare 35
- In our opinion: Attempting to... 32
- My view: 'Death with dignity' and... 27
- In our opinion: Concerned voters a good... 23
- Trump and Sanders 22
- John Hoffmire: Electric cars and the... 20